One man, one city, one fine vodka...

September 07, 2006

"But the detention and interrogation regime that Mr. Bush wants Congress
to sanction is almost as bad as the one the Supreme Court forced him to
set aside in the Hamdan case . . . . But they were not 'lawful' -- at least not as the Supreme Court has articulated the law."

Now, perhaps I'm missing something (I am just a lowly 2L), but I thought that Hamdan
determined the military commissions set up to be unconstitutional and that Hamdi found the detentions to be constitutional. I don't remember Hamdan
being ordered released. In fact, the Court's opinion
specifically says "It bears emphasizing that Hamdan does not challenge,
and we do not today address, the Government's power to detain him for
the duration of active hostilities in order to prevent such harm."
(Slip Opinion at 72.) Justice Kennedy in his concurrence notes without
objection that "regardless of the outcome of the criminal proceedings
at issue, the Government claims authority to continue to detain him
based on his status as an enemy combatant." (Slip Opinion at 11,
Kennedy, J. concurring.)

Furthermore, Justice Breyer in his
concurrence states "Nothing prevents the President from returning to
Congress to seek the authority he believes necessary." (Slip Opinion at
1, Breyer, J. concurring.) This is exactly what the President is
doing.

I've read through Hamdan and have found no place where the Court makes a ruling on the legality or Constitutionality any interrogation efforts or policies.

Did The Washington Post not read
Hamdan (admittedly, it's quite long) or do they just not care?

May 03, 2006

Well, I can't say that I'm too surprised by this. Students across the country will want for sodas during their lunch breaks (though diet soda will be available) under a new agreement among soda companies, Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, and former President Bill Clinton. It makes sense in some ways--it looks good for PR purposes and it probably cuts off potential lawsuits. I think the suits are frivolous and I doubt the soda industry would ever lose one. While I understand why they made this decision, I have to say the capitulation is a little disappointing. It continues the abdication of personal responsibility that American society has experienced since probably the free-love era of the 1960s. Ever since the boomers rebelled against society's rules, they've thrown off the requirement that people live with the consequences of their decisions. This mentality is present in a lot of areas today, you see it in criminal defenses all the time. This is just another one where everyone says... "It's not my fault."

May 02, 2006

Well, I've finished up 3 exams so far this semester and have one left to go. That means that I'm one three hour exam away from completing my first year of law school. All in all, it's been a rewarding experience. Sure, the cases about dog bits, breaking damns, knifemakers, the Trident building, exploding packages, trains, etc, get old, but it wasn't that bad. Beyond that, I've made some great friends. It's funny, despite the things that have gone wrong in the last year, I have to say the last two, overall have been a hell of a success.

Professionally: I found a new job when I needed to and it paid more than I was making. Less than three months later, I was hired away with a nice bump in salary and more time off for school. Since then I've been approached about another job with another bump in salary, but had to pass.

Academically: After having decided I would try to go to law school three years ago and being rejected by the only school I applied to. Last year, I applied to another local school on a whim at the deadline, and through a little extra work managed to get accepted. I posted a GPA higher than anytime since high school in the first semester, placing me near the top of my class (also for the first time since high school). I applied for transfer after an agonizing decision process and have now been accepted to the law school that rejected me the first time.

Personally: Well, we all know that it hasn't been perfect here. Despite the one glaring downpoint, all-in-all, it's pretty damn good. I've made more close friends in the one year of law school than I did in four years of college. They've been great for studying, hanging out with, debating things, and were a source of support and strength when I needed it. My health is so much better than it was. I look a lot better and feel a lot better than I did in the past. Consequently, in the last six months I've been on dates with more women than in the previous 27 years of my life. Now, none of those have worked out, but I'm not worried about that right now. Plenty of time for serious relationships. Of course, if you know any single women... don't hesitate to send them my way.

So, it's had its ups and downs, but who am I kidding? I'm happier than I've been in a long time. So, I'll just keep moving forward, enjoying life, having fun, studying hard, and hopefully making my life a success.

April 25, 2006

So, I was looking for something in some files tonight and it was something I hadn't seen in awhile, so I opened a box looking for it. I didn't find what I was looking for, but I did find another load of memories. It's amazing the things you keep over the course of a relationship... cards, letters, notes, trinkets, etc. When I found them, I was struck reading them all, I couldn't stop myself. I read through them for over 40 minutes. I expected a lot of pain, but I only found a little. I'm making progress, I guess.

It has been over six months now. I've been on dates, but to be honest, I haven't felt anything with any of them. I find myself wondering if my heart is just too scarred right now to love someone new and find that joy again. I wonder if it's just a matter of finding the right person that will open up my heart to someone new. I don't know. It's probably some combination of both.

Back to the box, reading through all of those cards, letters, and notes was a trip down memory lane. I could remember the little things that had inspired them. The little bumps in the road, the challenges we faced, etc. I also read through a bound book she gave me for my birthday. She had organized and printed all of our emails from the first three or so months of our relationship and bound them. Our song was on the inside cover. I read through the emails (about 35 pages, we were quite prolific). I was struck by how immature some of the emails struck me. On both of our parts, we seemed completely caught up in the romance of our relationship. I'm torn in I don't know if our love really was immature (it was by far our most serious and intense relationship) or if it was something else. Was our love that amazing that those statements of never-ending love (ha!), need, want, desire, etc, were reasonable? Would I fall as hard and as completely today? I doubt it, I've been jaded now and don't know that I'm capable of that type of love.

One thing is clear, I certainly put my all into the relationship. The emails I wrote are often so amazingly over-the-top romantic... they still strike me as amazing and heartfelt, if somewhat immature. I don't know, I'm clearly not an objective observer. Who knows why we do the things in our relationships? Especially, how do we know that in retrospect? Would we do that differently now? Did we learn from our experiences?

Overall, one thing I said many times in the emails still rings true to me. I will forever be different for the experiences we shared. I will live the rest of my life knowing the depth that love can reach. My life will forever be richer for that experience, regardless of how it ended. I will always think fondly of the time we shared. Everyone should be so lucky as to experience what I once had.

March 29, 2006

Look, I love kids. Anyone who knows me can probably tell you this. That doesn't mean I love your kids. Last night, I had the (dis)pleasure of being joined on my late-night Metro ride home from class by a brood of children. There were what seemed to be hundreds of them, all hopped up on cotton candy and giant lollipops (or so it seemed) from the circus. They were accompanied by several adults and this was clearly a group that got on the car as they all knew each other and were talking back and forth.

The kids were incredibly loud, somewhere between the roar of a 747 and the space shuttle. As if that wasn't bad enough, they were literally bouncing off the walls. Jumping up trying to reach the overhead rail, running back and forth, pushing their way through the crowded car, screaming at each other down the length of the car ("are you standing up?")

Parents, I beg of you... keep your brats under control. You've spoiled them to the point of pure rottenness. They don't mind you (I saw this myself); They don't care about other people (my feet and shoes were stomped on, landed on, and stepped on many times); and you just let them run wild. Worse than that, one of you, has the nerve to ask me to stand so your precious baby can sleep. I'm all about giving up my seat to a pregnant woman, disabled person, someone with a broken foot, elderly, etc. However, I don't know that I feel the need to give up my seat so that a woman in her mid-30s can put her (what appeared to be) 5 or 6 year-old child in the seat to sleep. (Why are you holding this kid anyway? She looked a little large for you to still be carrying around.)

I thought about posting this last night, but passed because I didn't want to look mean-spirited. This morning though, a woman was failing to control her two kids in the Metro station and they were running around like idiots. One of them, looking at the other instead of where they were going, ran directly into me. No apology from the kid (shock!). No apology from the mother (shock!). What did I get? Watch out for my kid! You've got to be freaking kidding me. I have to watch out for YOUR kid while walking in a straight line through the Metro station? I don't think so lady.

March 20, 2006

Do you ever wonder who they are? The people you see everyday... the woman on the Metro platform, the guy always in your Metro car, the woman walking the other way on the street. Do you recognize the faces from the hundreds you pass everyday? If you took them out of the context in which they've become familiar would you recognize them? Know where you've seen them before? It's amazing how when you leave home five minutes earlier, the whole group is different. The familiar faces replaced by hundreds of others, somehow more distant. They are all the faces of strangers, yet some seem closer than others. I wonder where they're off to in the morning. Where they work, where they come from, are they happy? Do you notice when their missing?

Well, it looks like Maryland should be embarrassed (and maybe their fans should shut up). Maryland (and its fans) were upset that they didn't get an at-large invite to the NCAA tournament and pouted by at first declining an invitation to the NIT. They were given a #1 seed in the NIT, only to be bounced in the first round by Manhattan. Meantime, a team that a lot of people complained about getting into the NCAA while powerhouse conference teams like Cincinnati, Maryland, and Florida State were left at home is busy knocking Michigan State (another powerhouse team in a powerhouse conference) right out of the NCAA. Congrats Patriots!

I always regarded those bumper stickers, "As long as there are tests, there will be prayer in schools," as humorous. Who knew that there are teachers that would advocate completely eliminating testing?

That's just what Colman McCarthy who teaches at School Without Walls, Wilson High School (DC), and Bethesda-Chevy Chase High School (MoCo) is advocating. It's ironic that I read this op-ed in The Post with It's Academic (a high school quiz show in DC/MD) on in the background.

I have never given a test. I respect my students too much to demean them with exercises in fake knowledge.

Ummm, okay. Exercises in fake knowledge? When did knowing history, math, how to read, or other things become "fake knowledge?" I always though knowing history was a good (that whole, those who don't know it are doomed to repeat it thing). Then again, perhaps for someone who teaches "nonviolence," a return to the days of Hitler and Stalin would be preferable as we could persuade them with compassion and appeasement.

I can only hope that the damage McCarthy is doing to his students is being undone by those other teachers who do care that their students learn the material. In life, your ability to perform is paramount. Your boss isn't going to care if you're a good person when you consistently cost the company money making mistakes. The boss cares that you know how to do your job.

American society has plenty of people who were academic whizzes in high
school but were so driven by the lure of a high grade-point average
that their spiritual lives remained stunted. I worry about students who
make too many A's.

Oh my. Now, I am concerned. I mean, after all, I received more than my fair share of As in high school. I had no idea my "spiritual life" was stunted. I'm not even sure what that means. No time for the arts? No, I took art, enjoy museums, and can name several artists. No time for music? No, I played in the orchestra for eight years and only gave it up when I stopped taking so many tests in college (and my grades dipped in college... hmmm). I stopped volunteering? Well, no, I tutored and volunteered in various groups in both high school and in college. Where exactly was my spiritual life stunted?

To compensate for my no-testing policy, I assign tons of homework.

Oh, Thank God. You do have some way of measuring achievement. Here I thought you just allowed your students to sit in class and talk about love-fests, Woodstock, and peace.

The assignments? Tell someone you love him or her. Do a favor for
someone who won't know you did it. Say a kind word to the workers at
the school: the people who clean the toilets, cook the food, drive the
buses and heat the buildings. And a warning: If you don't do the
homework, you'll fail. You'll fail your better self, you'll fail to
make the world better, you'll fail at being a peacemaker.

Oh, never mind.

I know of no meaningful evidence that acing tests has anything to do
with students' character development or whether their natural instincts
for idealism or altruism are nurtured.

Well, see, this would be problematic, if that was the purpose of the test. Tests are designed to measure your understanding and knowledge of important concepts... you know, math, science, history, those kinds of things. They aren't supposed to develop your character. Your character is supposed to be developed at home, at church, and at school. It's not the job of the test to do that. It's the job of the teacher, the parent, the pastor. (I'd argue, mostly the parent, but in this day and age, they aren't always the best role models.)

I have large amounts of evidence that tests promote the opposite:
character defects. After having two of my high school classes read
Mathews's column, I asked the students: If during a test the
opportunity came to cheat, with no fear of being caught, would you? A
majority of hands went up. A few students dismissed the question as
naive. Not cheat if you could get away with it? Get real.

Okay, now this bothers me but it has nothing to do with the test. This is a character defect that has been allowed to develop not because students take tests and are expected to learn the material but because those who teach, nurture, and guide students have failed in their responsibilities. McCarthy commits the classic logical fallacy cum hoc ergo propter hoc. He assumes that because his students have been shown to not regarding cheating as morally corrupt and revealed a character flaw it is because of the test. I doubt this very seriously. There is no evidence to support this. Just because the two occur at the same time does not imply causation.

You'd think as an educator, McCarthy would know better. Maybe he was too busy learning character to learn the real purpose of education.

March 16, 2006

Tom Bridge asks whether we really care about our neighborhoods in DC. Maybe I'm not qualified to comment, as I live in Maryland, but my general thoughts are DC does care about neighborhoods... some neighborhoods. All one has to do is look at real estate listings to see how some neighborhoods are growing expansively large. Take Dupont Circle, for example. It's now grown to encompass pretty much everything South of V, West of 13th NW, East of the Park, and North of K. Now, certainly, Dupont is in that area. I'd submit that large swaths of that area aren't at all Dupont. They have character completely different from Dupont and aren't really there. I have a friend who lives at One Scott Circle NW in Dupont Circle. One might wonder how Scott Circle could be in Dupont Circle without being concentric, but apparently, in DC real estate anything is possible. I've seen places on U-St and 13th described as Dupont Circle, though being the location of the U-Street/Cardozo Metro station.

I suspect that soon enough D.C. itself will cease to the District of Columbia and just be Dupont Circle as it swallows the city whole like a real estate monster.